Progressing a claim - Requests for further information about...

Learning Outcomes

This article outlines CPR Part 18 requests for further information about statements of case and their practical use in civil litigation, including:

• Appropriate use of CPR Part 18 and distinctions from disclosure (Part 31), expert questions (CPR 35.6), and amendments (Part 17)
• Focused, proportionate requests that clarify genuinely disputed issues while avoiding attempts to seek disclosure or witness evidence
• PD 18 requirements on form and content of requests and responses, including verification by statement of truth, filing and service, and sensible timeframes
• Grounds for objection (privilege, relevance, proportionality, and fishing expedition concerns) and narrower or alternative formulations
• Timelines and case strategy, including agreed extensions, stays of pleading, and applications to the court under CPR 18.1
• Consequences of non‑compliance (costs, unless orders, strike‑out, adverse inferences, restrictions on evidence) and the Denton relief from sanctions framework
• Track distinctions, including general small claims disapplication and targeted further information directions in fast‑ and multi‑track case management
• Tactical and safe use of Part 18 answers, their status once verified, amendment when positions change, and treatment as formal clarifications of statements of case

SQE1 Syllabus

For SQE1, you are required to understand the framework and practical application of CPR Part 18 requests for further information in civil litigation, with a focus on the following syllabus points:

• The purpose and scope of requests for further information under CPR Part 18, including their role in narrowing issues and clarifying statements of case or other matters in dispute.
• Procedure for making a request: form, content, service, time limits, and subsequent court application under Part 23 where appropriate.
• Requirements for responding: completeness, timing, statement of truth, filing and service, and how to handle information not yet available.
• Grounds for objection and best practice in responding in part, objecting in part, and proposing alternatives.
• Sanctions and costs consequences for non‑compliance or misuse, including unless orders, strike‑out and adverse inferences, and relief from sanctions.
• Distinguishing CPR Part 18 from disclosure (Part 31), requests to experts (CPR 35.6), and amendments (Part 17).
• Track considerations: small claims disapplication absent court direction; targeted multi‑track directions to file “further information to clarify either party’s case”.

Test Your Knowledge

Attempt these questions before reading this article. If you find some difficult or cannot remember the answers, remember to look more closely at that area during your revision.

1. Under which Part of the Civil Procedure Rules are requests for further information about statements of case governed?
   1. Part 16
   2. Part 17
   3. Part 18
   4. Part 23
2. Before applying to the court for an order for further information under CPR Part 18, what procedural step should a party normally take first?
   1. File a defence
   2. Serve a witness statement
   3. Make a written request to the other party
   4. Apply for summary judgment
3. Which of the following is NOT a valid ground for objecting to a request for further information?
   1. The information requested is not reasonably necessary.
   2. Providing the information would be disproportionately expensive.
   3. The information is contained within a privileged document.
   4. The information requested relates to a matter not currently in dispute.

Introduction

During the course of civil litigation, it is essential that each party clearly understands the case they have to meet. Statements of case (such as the particulars of claim or the defence) set out the basis of each party's position. However, sometimes these documents may lack clarity or sufficient detail, leaving the opposing party uncertain about specific allegations or the factual basis relied upon. CPR Part 18 provides a mechanism for parties to seek clarification or additional information about matters raised in statements of case or other relevant matters in dispute. Properly utilised, Part 18 requests can help to narrow the issues, prevent surprise at trial, and facilitate fair and efficient case management in line with the overriding objective.

Key Term: Statement of Case
A formal court document setting out a party's case, such as the claim form, particulars of claim, defence, counterclaim, or reply to defence.

Part 18 is a case‑management tool, not a means to obtain disclosure or witness evidence. It is most commonly used in fast‑ and multi‑track claims, often alongside directions given at a case management conference. In small claims, Part 18 does not generally apply unless the court directs otherwise, reflecting the simpler and more informal procedure on that track.

Purpose of CPR Part 18

The primary purpose of CPR Part 18 is to enable a party to obtain the information reasonably required to understand the case they have to meet, or to prepare their own case effectively. It aims to ensure that litigation proceeds on the basis of clearly defined issues, avoiding ambiguity and potential misunderstandings.

Requests under Part 18 should be focused on clarifying matters genuinely in dispute or seeking necessary additional details. They should not be used as a ‘fishing expedition’ to obtain broad disclosure of evidence or to harass the opponent. The court expects requests to be proportionate to the needs of the case, considering factors such as the complexity of the issues and the amount of money involved.

Key Term: Request for Further Information
A formal written request made by one party to another seeking clarification of a matter in dispute or additional information relating to such a matter, usually concerning a statement of case.

Appropriate use includes:

• Identifying the particular contractual terms alleged to have been breached where only general wording has been pleaded.
• Particularising the factual basis of a causation or loss allegation where it is unclear what is said to have caused the pleaded loss.
• Clarifying whether a pleaded allegation is admitted, denied, or not admitted where a response is ambiguous.

Inappropriate use includes:

• Demanding “all facts and matters relied upon” without focus or connection to specific pleaded issues.
• Seeking production of documents or categories of documents (the proper route is disclosure).
• Requiring a party to set out witness evidence or expert opinion before the directions timetable has run its course (properly dealt with under CPR 35 or at witness statement stage).

Key Term: Statement of Truth
A formal confirmation that a party believes the facts stated in a document are true. False statements verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in their truth may amount to contempt of court.

Procedure for Requesting Further Information

CPR Part 18 and its accompanying Practice Direction (PD 18) outline a two-stage process for seeking further information.

Initial Written Request

The first step, required by PD 18 para 1, is for the party seeking information (the requesting party) to serve a written request on the party from whom the information is sought (the responding party).

The request must:

• Be concise and strictly confined to matters reasonably necessary and proportionate to enable the requesting party to prepare their case or understand the case they have to meet.
• Ideally be made in a single, comprehensive document (not piecemeal).
• State a reasonable date by which the response should be served (14 days is common in straightforward claims; more may be appropriate for complex issues).
• Be served in a separate document, wherever practicable, clearly headed “Request for Further Information (CPR Part 18)” with the court title and claim number, and set out in numbered paragraphs that cross‑refer to the relevant paragraph(s) of the pleading or issue in dispute.

Practical drafting guidance:

• Ask only what is required to clarify the pleaded point. If the answer is likely to be “the relevant documents will be provided on disclosure”, the question is probably misdirected.
• Use one sub‑heading per issue and short requests (one point per numbered paragraph).
• Where multiple parties are involved, identify the specific party to whom each request is directed.

Service is effected under Part 6 in the usual way. Parties should work cooperatively on timelines, especially if an agreed extension to a pleading deadline is sensible pending receipt of an answer.

Application to the Court

If the responding party fails to provide the information requested within the specified time, or if the response is considered inadequate, the requesting party may apply to the court for an order under CPR 18.1.

The court has the power to order a party to:

• (a) clarify any matter which is in dispute in the proceedings; or
• (b) give additional information in relation to any such matter.

An application is made under Part 23 and should include:

• The request document (as an exhibit).
• A succinct witness statement explaining why the information is reasonably necessary and proportionate and what attempts have been made to resolve matters without an application.
• A draft order that sets out each question and the date for the response, and recites the requirement for verification by statement of truth.

The court will consider the application in light of the overriding objective, ensuring that any order made is just and manages the case efficiently. The court may refuse oppressive requests, narrow or reframe questions, set a strict timetable, and give related directions (for example, extending time to serve a defence until a response is served). In multi‑track claims the court often deploys Part 18 orders at or soon after the CMC to get the issues firmly defined.

Track considerations:

• Small claims: Part 18 is generally disapplied; the court may nonetheless direct clarification where necessary to do justice.
• Fast track: short, focused questions are more likely to be ordered, tied to standard directions timetables.
• Multi‑track: the court may give a bespoke direction requiring “further information to clarify either party’s case” as part of case management.

Responding to a Request for Further Information

Obligations of the Responding Party

The party receiving a Part 18 Request has a duty to respond within the time specified in the request (or ordered by the court). The response must be in writing, dated, and signed by the responding party or their legal representative.

Key Term: Response
The formal written answer provided by a party to a Request for Further Information made under CPR Part 18.

Importantly, the response must be verified by a statement of truth (PD 18 para 5). This emphasises the seriousness of the information provided, as making a false statement without an honest belief in its truth can lead to contempt of court proceedings.

Practical points for responses:

• Mirror the numbering of the request and cross‑refer to the relevant paragraph(s) of the statement of case.
• Answer each request clearly and directly. Where the information is not yet known after reasonable inquiry, say so, explain the steps taken, and give a date by which you expect to be able to answer (or explain why you cannot).
• If the information sought will be provided through another formal step (for example, standard disclosure or expert Q&A under CPR 35.6), say so and, if helpful, indicate when that step will occur under the directions timetable.
• File the response at court and serve it on all other parties, complying with any order regarding format and timing.

If the request is extensive or complex, consider seeking an agreed extension of time to ensure accuracy. If the request ties into an imminent pleading deadline (for example, service of a defence), request a short stay or extension so that you can plead fully after receiving the clarification.

Key Term: Unless order
A conditional (“unless”) order specifies that a party must take a step by a stated date, failing which a stated sanction (such as strike‑out of part of a statement of case) will automatically apply.

Objecting to a Request

A responding party is not obliged to answer every request made. They may object to providing some or all of the information sought if there are valid grounds for doing so (PD 18 para 2). Common grounds for objection include:

• The request is not reasonably necessary for the requesting party to prepare their case or understand the case they have to meet.
• Providing the information would be disproportionate in terms of cost or effort compared to the benefit gained, having regard to the track, value, and complexity of the claim.
• The request amounts to a “fishing expedition” seeking evidence rather than clarification of pleaded issues.
• The information sought is privileged (for example, legal advice privilege, litigation privilege, or without prejudice communications).
• The information requested relates to matters not currently in dispute or goes beyond the pleaded issues.
• The request improperly seeks documents (a matter for disclosure) or witness/expert evidence (dealt with by CPR 32/35).

Best practice is to answer what can properly be answered, object to the remainder with short, precise grounds, and, where possible, propose a narrower alternative that would be acceptable. This approach reduces the risk of costs penalties if an application follows.

Worked Example 1.1

A Claimant issues proceedings for breach of contract, alleging numerous defects in goods supplied. The Particulars of Claim state: "The goods supplied were defective in multiple respects rendering them unfit for purpose." The Defendant finds this allegation too vague. What should the Defendant do?

Answer:
The Defendant should first send a written Request for Further Information under CPR Part 18 to the Claimant. The Request should ask the Claimant to clarify precisely which goods were allegedly defective, what the specific defects were for each item, and why these defects rendered the goods unfit for their intended purpose. The Request should specify a reasonable deadline for the response (e.g., 14 days). If the Claimant fails to provide adequate clarification, the Defendant can then apply to the court for an order compelling the Claimant to provide the information.

Worked Example 1.2

In response to a Defendant's Part 18 Request, the Claimant provides answers but fails to verify the Response with a statement of truth. The Defendant's solicitor notices this omission. What is the significance of this failure?

Answer:
The failure to verify the Response with a statement of truth means it does not comply with PD 18 para 5. Consequently, the Response cannot be relied upon as evidence by the Claimant. The Defendant's solicitor should write to the Claimant's solicitor pointing out the defect and requesting that a compliant, verified Response be served. If this is not done, the Defendant could apply to the court for an order compelling compliance or potentially to strike out parts of the Claimant's case related to the unverified information.

Worked Example 1.3

A defendant receives a request which includes: “Please provide copies of all emails, letters and documents you will rely upon at trial,” and “Please set out all witness evidence you will adduce.” Is this proper under Part 18?

Answer:
No. The first question improperly seeks documents, which is a matter for disclosure (standard disclosure or an order for specific disclosure). The second improperly seeks witness evidence, which will be served through witness statements pursuant to directions. The respondent should object on those grounds, indicate that documents will be disclosed in line with the disclosure timetable, and that witness evidence will be provided via CPR 32 statements, and answer only any proper clarificatory questions.

Worked Example 1.4

Particulars of claim allege negligence but say only “the defendant failed to exercise reasonable care,” with no particulars of breach. The defence is due in 14 days. Can the defendant seek more time pending clarification?

Answer:
Yes. The defendant should promptly serve a focused Part 18 request for particulars of breach and seek the claimant’s agreement to extend time to serve the defence (up to 28 days by agreement) or ask the court to order that the defence be served a set number of days after receipt of the claimant’s response. The court has power to extend time and to direct that information be provided to allow proper pleading.

Worked Example 1.5

A party wants answers from the other side’s expert about calculations in an exchanged report. Should they use Part 18?

Answer:
No. Questions for experts are governed by CPR 35.6. A party should put written questions to the expert within 28 days of service of the report, confined to clarification of the report. Part 18 is not the correct route for expert questions.

Consequences of Non-Compliance

Failure to respond adequately or at all to a Part 18 Request, or failure to comply with a court order made under CPR 18.1, can lead to sanctions. The court has various case management powers it can exercise, including:

• Making an 'unless order', requiring the defaulting party to comply by a specific date, failing which their statement of case (or part of it) may be struck out.
• Making an adverse costs order against the defaulting party (often on the application).
• Preventing the defaulting party from relying on certain evidence or issues at trial, or treating a matter as admitted for case‑management purposes.
• Drawing adverse inferences from the failure to provide information.
• Extending the other party’s time to plead or to take a step until the information is provided.

If a party is subject to a sanction for non‑compliance (for example, part of a pleading is struck out) they may seek relief from sanctions. The court will apply the Denton three‑stage approach, looking at seriousness/significance of the breach, reasons for it, and all the circumstances, including promptness of any application and the need to enforce compliance with rules and orders.

Costs:

• Where a request was proper and reasonable attempts were made to resolve matters, the defaulting party risks an adverse costs order on the application.
• Where a request was oppressive or unnecessary, costs may be awarded against the requesting party even if some order is made, and in serious cases on the indemnity basis.
• In fast‑track and multi‑track claims, the work associated with Part 18 requests and responses should be budgeted for; disproportionate spending may not be recovered on assessment.

Use of answers at trial:

• A verified response is an important clarification and may be put to a witness in cross‑examination.
• Where positions change, parties should seek permission to amend pleadings and serve updated further information to avoid inconsistency.

Small claims track:

• Part 18 is generally disapplied. The court may, however, give short, practical directions for clarification where essential to do justice, but the expectation is that small claims proceed without extensive interlocutory steps.

Exam Warning

Remember the two-stage process: a written request must precede a court application. An application made without first requesting the information informally is likely to be criticised by the court and may carry adverse costs consequences, unless there is a very good reason for not making the initial request (e.g., urgency or previous refusal to engage).

Key Point Checklist

This article has covered the following key knowledge points:

• CPR Part 18 allows parties to request further information to clarify disputed matters in statements of case or other relevant issues.
• The purpose is to ensure clarity, narrow issues, avoid surprise, and manage cases efficiently in line with the overriding objective.
• A written request should be made first before applying to the court. Use a single, clearly headed document with numbered, targeted questions.
• Requests must be concise, proportionate, and reasonably necessary; they are not a substitute for disclosure, witness statements, or expert questions.
• Responses must be timely, mirror the request, and be verified by a statement of truth. If information is not yet available, explain why and when it will be.
• Valid grounds to object include irrelevance, disproportionality, privilege, requests seeking documents or evidence, and matters outside the pleaded issues.
• Courts may stay or extend pleading deadlines to allow responses and will tailor orders to the track and complexity of the case.
• Non‑compliance may lead to unless orders, strike‑out, adverse inferences, and costs sanctions; relief from sanctions is assessed under Denton.
• Part 18 is generally disapplied to the small claims track unless the court directs otherwise; in fast‑ and multi‑track cases it is a common, focused case‑management tool.

Key Terms and Concepts

• Statement of Case
• Request for Further Information
• Response
• Statement of Truth
• Unless order